Watson and Raynor

To see if it's possible to induce a fear of a previously unfeared object through classical conditioning. To see if the fear will be transferred to similar objects. See what effect time will have on the fear response. See if we can remove the fear.

1 of 18

Describe the methodology of their study

A case study on one child: Little Albert in controlled laboratory conditions.

2 of 18

Who were the participants of W+R's study?

Little Albert was the child of a wet nurse and lived in a hospital environment. He was stolid and unemotional. Albert had no fearful reactions to a rat, a rabbit, a dog, a monkey, a mask with hair or cotton wool.

3 of 18

What did a test show and how old was Albert at the time?

A test when Little Albert was 8 months old showed he reacted violently when a suspended steel bar was hit with a hammer. He was startled, held his breath and began to cry. Response was used to condition Albert to fear rats and other stimuli.

4 of 18

Describe the design

A single-subject design. Behaviours measured were Albert's reactions to various stimuli before and after conditioning.

5 of 18

What was the procedure in Watson and Raynor's study?

Albert's baseline reactions to stimuli were noted as having no sign of a fear response. When Albert was 11 months old the experiments started.

6 of 18

Describe what happened in session 1

When Albert was presented with the rat, the steel bar was struck just as he reached for the rat. This was repeated. The 1st time it was struck, Albert fell forwards and jumped. The 2nd time he began to whimper. He was then given a week off.

7 of 18

What happened in session 2?

The rat alone was presented, then 3 presentations were made with the rat and the loud noise. Followed by 1 presentation of rat, 2 more with rat+noise, then rat alone. 7 presentations of rat+noise.

8 of 18

What were the findings after the 5 paired presentations in session 2?

Albert reacted to the rat alone by immediately crying, turning to the left and crawling quickly away from the rat.

9 of 18

How did they try to transfer the fear in session 3?

Albert brought back 5 days later, played with toy blocks. This was a neutral stimulus used to stop the fear response. Presentations of the rat followed by rabbit, dog, seal-fur coat, cotton wool, Watson's hair, Santa Claus mask.

10 of 18

What was used to calm Albert down and what were the findings about transferring the fear?

To see how time affected response, 5 days later presented with rat alone. Response was weaker so it was freshened up. Response to rabbit and dog conditioned by hitting steel bar when they were presented.

12 of 18

Where was Albert taken to to test the response elsewhere?

Taken to a well-lit theatre. Albert cried and crawled away from the rat, rabbit and dog. The fear reaction was slight in a different room. Once the fear was freshened again, the fear response to the stimuli was pronounced. Blocks produced no fear.

13 of 18

What happened in session 5?

One month later, Albert was tested with various stimuli e.g. the Santa Claus mask, the fur coat, the rat, rabbit and dog.

14 of 18

What were the findings found about the fear reactions?

Continued to show fear reactions to a varying degree to all stimuli, sometimes crying, sometimes crawling away. Less frightened by rabbit + wanted to play with it but still showed fear response.

15 of 18

What were the conclusions for session 2?

After 5 paired presentations, the conditioning of a fear response was evident. It is possible to condition fear through classical conditioning.

16 of 18

What conclusions were drawn after session 3 and 4?

Transference of the feat had been made to other similar objects. Objects less like the original stimulus e.g. cotton wool resulted in less negativity.

17 of 18

What conclusions were drawn from session 5 and after?

Time had not removed the fear response. Albert taken out of hospital after session 5, so never able to test of trying to find ways to remove the phobia in the lab.